Addressing social sustainability in residential development

(1)

DEGREE PROJECT,

CIVIL ENGINEERING AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT REAL ESTATE AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT MASTER OF SCIENCE, 30 CREDITS, SECOND LEVEL STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN 2016

An analysis of a residential developer and two municipalities in Sweden

Linn Forsman and Sofie Jonsson

ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

(2)

Master of Science thesis

Title Addressing social sustainability in residential

development - An analysis of a residential developer and two municipalities in Sweden

Author(s) Linn Forsman and Sofie Jonsson

Department

Master Thesis number Real Estate and Construction Management

TRITA-FOB-PrK-MASTER-2016:9

Archive number 415

Supervisor Tina Karrbom Gustavsson

Keywords Social sustainability, residential development,

planning process, cooperation, values

Abstract

Social sustainability is one of the three dimensions in the concept of sustainability and is seen as the weakest pillar of sustainable development. Previous literature concludes that social sustainability is a difficult concept to define and achieve. Therefore, the social dimension has not been addressed to the same extent and has been frequently avoided in research and practice. However the importance of the social dimension of sustainable development has been recognized from both the private and the public sector during the last decade. The social aspect of sustainability requires more attention and it is important to define the social sustainability processes that should be integrated during the planning phase of residential development projects.

The purpose of this research is to contribute with knowledge about how social sustainability can be addressed in the housing industry and within the scientific fields of urban planning and project development. By looking deeper, from both the developer and municipality perspective, into how social sustainability aspects are addressed today, how cooperation regarding these aspects is working, what values a focus on social aspects can create for both parties as well as desires for the future, the research also aims to provide a recommendation of how residential developers can improve their working process.

Four projects located both in Stockholm and Gothenburg have been used as a basis for the empirics in this research. Empirical information has been collected primarily through interviews but also from existing social sustainability tools. Interviews were conducted with representatives from JM AB and the municipalities of Stockholm and Gothenburg.

The research has identified that concrete tools, cooperation, clear objectives, and an understanding of each other’s aims and goals are crucial for a good working process regarding social sustainability. A recommended working process has been developed with the aim of helping residential developers to address social sustainability in residential projects. The identified steps in the recommendation provide an understanding of how developers should work with social sustainability internally and in cooperation with the municipality. By working systematically with social sustainability in residential development, the research indicates that developers can become more attractive in the eyes of the municipality and thus gain a competitive advantage over their competitors as well as increase the possibility of creating shared values.

(3)

Examensarbete

Titel Hantering av social hållbarhet inom

bostadsutveckling - En analys av en

bostadsutvecklare och två kommuner i Sverige

Författare Linn Forsman och Sofie Jonsson

Institution

Examensarbete Master nivå Fastigheter och Byggande

TRITA-FOB-PrK-MASTER-2016:9

Arkiv nummer 415

Handledare Tina Karrbom Gustavsson

Nyckelord Social hållbarhet, bostadsutveckling,

planeringsprocessen, samarbete, värden

Sammanfattning

Social hållbarhet är en av tre dimensioner i begreppet hållbarhet och ses som den svagaste pelaren för hållbar utveckling. Tidigare litteratur drar slutsatsen att social hållbarhet är ett svårt begrepp att definiera och uppnå. Därför har den sociala dimensionen inte behandlats i samma utsträckning och har ofta undvikits i forskning och praktik. Däremot har betydelsen av den sociala dimensionen av hållbar utveckling uppmärksammats av både den privata och den offentliga sektorn under det senaste decenniet.

Den sociala aspekten kräver mer uppmärksamhet och det är viktigt att fastställa de sociala hållbarhetsprocesser som bör integreras under planeringsfasen i bostadsutvecklingsprojekt.

Syftet med denna studie är att bidra med kunskap om hur social hållbarhet kan hanteras i bostadsbranschen och inom de vetenskapliga områdena stadsplanering och projektutveckling. Genom att, från både bostadsutvecklarens och kommunens perspektiv, djupare undersöka hur sociala hållbarhetsaspekter behandlas i dag, hur samarbete kring dessa aspekter fungerar, vilka värden ett fokus på sociala aspekter kan skapa för båda parter samt önskemål för framtiden, syftar studien också till att ge en rekommendation för hur bostadsutvecklare kan förbättra sin arbetsprocess. Fyra projekt som ligger både i Stockholm och Göteborg har använts som underlag till empirin i denna undersökning Empirisk information har samlats in, främst genom intervjuer, men också utifrån befintliga sociala hållbarhetsverktyg. Intervjuerna genomfördes med representanter från JM AB och kommunerna Stockholm och Göteborg.

Studien har identifierat att konkreta verktyg, samarbete, tydliga mål och en förståelse för varandras syften och mål är avgörande för en god arbetsprocess beträffande social hållbarhet. En rekommenderad arbetsprocess har utvecklats i syfte till att hjälpa bostadsutvecklare att adressera social hållbarhet i bostadsprojekt. De identifierade stegen i rekommendationen ger en förståelse för hur bostadsutvecklare ska arbeta med social hållbarhet internt och i samarbete med kommunen. Genom att arbeta systematiskt med social hållbarhet i bostadsutveckling, visar studien att bostadsutvecklare kan bli mer attraktiva i kommunens ögon och därmed få en konkurrensfördel gentemot sina konkurrenter, samt öka möjligheten att skapa gemensamma värden.

(4)

Acknowledgement

This master degree project was written during spring 2016 as the final part of the master program in Real Estate and Construction Management at the Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm, Sweden. The master degree project comprises 30 credits and was conducted for the institution of Real Estate and Construction Management at the Royal Institute of Technology, in collaboration with JM AB.

For us, the way from initial idea to finished project report has not been obvious at all times and there are some people that truly have contributed and helped us along the way. Therefore we wish to acknowledge the persons whom have been indispensable support for us.

A big thanks go out to our supervisor Tina Karrbom Gustavsson at the department of Real Estate and Construction Management at the Royal Institute of Technology for all support, guidance, constructive feedback and all good discussions. The quality of this degree project would not have been as good if it weren’t for Tina’s support.

We would also like to thank JM for the opportunity to write this thesis in collaboration with your company and especially we want to thank the respondents who contributed with their time and knowledge, without you contribution this master degree project would not have been conducted. A very special thanks go to our supervisor at JM, sustainability chief Per Löfgren. We are thankful for your support, good discussions and input throughout the research.

Another great thank we would like to give all respondents at the City Planning Offices in Stockholm and Gothenburg for contributing to the research by devoting your time. Your point of view has been invaluable input to this research.

Finally, a big thanks to all our loved ones and everyone else who in various ways have helped and inspired us during the process.

Stockholm 2016

Linn Forsman & Sofie Jonsson

(5)

Abbreviation and Swedish translation

DDP Detailed Development Plan Detaljplan

PBA Planning and Building Act Plan- och bygglagen

SIA Social Impact Assessment Socialkonsekvensbeskrivning CIA Child Impact Assessment Barnkonsekvensbeskrivning

SKAPA Strukturerad Kundanalys (Structured Client analysis),

Platsanalys (Site analysis) & Produktanalys (Product analysis)

Land allocation agreement Markanvisningsavtal Land development agreement Expolateringsavtal

Municipal planning monopoly Kommunala planmonopolet City Planning Committee Stadsbyggnadsnämnden City Planning Office Stadsbyggnadskontoret Preliminary response Planbesked

Program phase Programskede

Consultation phase Samrådsskede Examination phase Granskningsskede

Approval phase Antagningsskede

(6)

--- The following chapter will present the background information of the research paper and give a deeper insight in the subject. To get a greater understanding of the researcher's intentions with this paper, a purpose has been formulated. The purpose is followed by the research questions that will be investigated.

At the end of this chapter, delimitations will be presented to set the boundaries for the research.

--- 1.1 Background

The construction industry has a major impact on the society and sustainability hasfor a long time been an important topic for both industry and academia. Environmental, economicand social aspects have to be considered during all types of construction activities (Zuo et al., 2012). However, current sustainability studies in construction mainly address environmental and economical issues. Social sustainability is a difficult concept that has been frequently avoided inresearch (Zuo et al., 2012). The construction industry must support sustainable development by including the social aspect during the whole life cycle of the project. At the same time, it is obvious that particularly the social dimension is perceived as a major challenge in sustainable development in Sweden (Boverket, 2010).

The Swedish municipalities are responsible for the design of land and water use within their geographic boundaries (Boverket, 2016a). However, even if the municipalities have the formal responsibility for, and the right to adopt detailed development plans (DDPs), a lot of the responsibility in the urban planning process often lies on the residential developer. Today it is common that the developer initiates the planning process and takes great responsibility in the development of the plan proposal. It is not a problem free process for the municipalities to realize the ambitions for social sustainability. (Boverket, 2010) Therefore, the municipalities need to cooperate with developers in the planning process.

Residential development is a complex process that can include anything from the purchase of rawland, to renovation of existing buildings and served sites for other to develop. Roulac et al. (2006)argue that it is widely accepted that the aim with residential development is value creation and that the creation of value is involved in all types of development actions since they strive to convert apotential opportunity into a real estate product. Langford et al. (2013)concludes that value for a construction industry is wealth while value for clients is the satisfaction of their expectations and according to Porter and Kramer (2011) companies can create value for themselves while still generating value for the society and communities it operates in. Social and economical considerations, such as the impact of construction on the society will improve long-term performance and in the same time produce value for those affected by the project (Valdes-Vasquez& Klotz, 2013).

There are major challenges in designing a constructive sustainable development process in which actors with different interests and time frames are involved (SGBC, 2016a). A significant increase in the importance of social sustainability has recently been recognized from both the public and private sector.

However, stakeholders in the construction industry have not addressed the concept social sustainability to the same extent (Edum-Fotwe & Price, 2009). Therefore, there is a lack of recommendations regarding how residential developers should work with social sustainability issues in the planning process together with the municipality. It is unclear how residential developers should integrate social sustainability issues in order to create values for both themselves (the company) and the municipality (society as a whole).

(9)

1.2 Purpose

The purpose of this research is to contribute with knowledge about how social sustainability can be addressed in the housing industry and within the scientific fields of urban planning and project development.

The aim is to provide an understanding of:

1. How social aspects are addressed during earlier phases of residential planning today.

2. How cooperation regarding these aspects is working between the developer and the municipality.

3. What values a focus on social aspects can create for both parties.

By looking deeper into how social sustainability aspects are addressed in the earlier phases of residential development, the aim is to provide a recommended working process to residential developers and thereby contribute with knowledge about how developers can focus on social sustainability in future development projects.

1.3 Research questions Main question:

How can residential developers improve their working process regarding social sustainability in development projects in order to create value for both the company and the society?

Sub questions:

How do the working process work today and what are the desires for a future process?

How do cooperation between the developer and the municipality work today and what are the desires for future cooperation?

What values can be created for the developer as well as the municipality when social aspects are prioritized in the planning process?

1.4 Delimitations

The delimitations of the study have been done at the beginning and throughout the research process.

Initial delimitations were made and some delimitations were added during the process due to new knowledge acquired from the literature and the empirical study. The delimitations will provide the reader with an understanding of the focus of the research and to some extent also why that particular focus has been chosen.

The literature review will present the interdependence between social, economic and environmental sustainability aspects, but based on the purpose and the scope of this research the empirical analysis will only focus on the social sustainability dimension. The relationship between the aspects and the affect they have on each other is not considered.

The research is conducted at the private developer JM AB, from now on referred to as JM. Therefore the study is delimited to private residential development projects in which JM either owns the land or projects where the municipality has allocated land to JM. Other private developers than JM are not included in the research. Due to the scope and the timeframe of the research, the study is delimited to concentrate on two municipalities; Stockholm and Gothenburg. These two municipalities are chosen since JM operates in these regions and cooperates with both municipalities in development projects. Gothenburg municipality has also gotten further than Stockholm with the work of addressing social sustainability aspects in the

(10)

The purpose of the research is to get an understanding of the current situation of the planning process where DPPs are developed. Based on that understanding the aim is to provide a recommendation to developers about how they can develop a process where social aspects are addressed and thereby enable value creation for both the municipality and the developer. Since focus lies on the planning process, the study is delimited to include project developers/managers from the developer as well as planning architects/project managers from the municipalities that are responsible for the development of DDPs towards their own organization. Perspectives from officials with other positions within the developers or the municipality's organizations are omitted.

This research can be viewed as a first step towards a changing process in the way of working with social sustainability issues in the planning process. How the implementation of the working process should take place will not particularly be addressed in this thesis. However, the study discusses how implementation is facilitated by the choice of recommendations given to developers.

(11)

2. Method

--- The following chapter outlines the methodological choices conducted in the study. The aim is to provide the reader with an understanding of the chosen research approach and how data was collected, both empirically and theoretically. The choices made regarding course of action are argued for. Finally the methodological choices are critically reviewed with respect to validity, reliability and source criticism.

--- 2.1 Research approach

Theories and observations are the two pillars of science, and scientific research therefore operates at both a theoretical and an empirical level. Continuously moving back and forth between theory and observations is what scientific research is all about. It is not possible to conduct scientific research without including both the components of theory and observations. (Bhattacherjee, 2012)

2.1.1 Abductive research approach

In scientific research mainly two different approaches to methodology are discussed; the inductive approach and the deductive approach. The inductive approach means that theories are developed using data, which then can be related to literature. The deductive approach means that literature is used to identify theories that will be tested using data (Saunders et al., 2009). There is also a third approach to methodology; the abductive approach in which theory and empirics are performed alternately and combined (Alvesson & Sköldberg, 2009).

The purpose of this research is to investigate how residential developers in cooperation with the municipality should work with social sustainability in order to create values for both the company and the society, with the aim to relate the findings to existing theory. This can be described as an inductive approach. Furthermore, some theory is used as a basis for the empirical findings, which can be described as a deductive method. Therefore the study combines both inductive and deductive reasoning and the research method for this thesis will be abductive. The process is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Abductive approach. (Inspired by M Le Duc, 2007)

2.1.2 Exploratory approach

The exploratory approach is appropriate if the purpose of the research is to scope out the magnitude or extent of a particular phenomenon, problem or behavior (Bhattacherjee, 2012). How developers should work with social sustainability during construction projects is rather unexplored in the construction industry (Zuo et al., 2012). There is a need for a recommended working process that can be used as a guideline regarding how social sustainability issues should be handled in the planning process. Therefore the exploratory approach is suitable for this thesis. There are different ways of conducting an exploratory research: searching for literature and interviewing experts in the subject (Saunders et al., 2009). In this thesis, both these two methods will be used. The study will start with a literature review that will give a foundation of information to the following research.

(12)

2.1.3 Qualitative study

Scientific research can be either qualitative or quantitative. Quantitative analysis is driven by statistics and is to a great extent independent of the researcher. Qualitative analysis on the other hand depends heavily on the researcher’s analytic and integrative skills as well as personal knowledge of the social context where the data is collected. While quantitative analysis is about predicting and explaining qualitative analysis is about sense making and understanding of a phenomenon. (Saunders et al., 2009) This research is to a great extent dependent on the researchers analytical and integrative skills when analyzing the empirical findings based on theory and previous knowledge within the field, therefore a qualitative approach is used.

2.2 Data collection

A study of a residential developer active in both Stockholm and Gothenburg region has been made in this research. Two housing projects in Stockholm and two in Gothenburg are used as reference projects. This decision was taken based on initial interviews with an expert within the field of social sustainability as well as project developers at JM. They provided the research with indications that Gothenburg municipality has gotten further than Stockholm with the work of addressing social sustainability aspects in the planning process. The four projects were chosen based on their differences in size of planning area, degree of exploitation, land ownership and location. The aim is not to draw conclusions about the differences between the cities, instead the purpose is to get a broader understanding of the situation today, thus four different types of projects were chosen. The projects looked upon set the boundaries for the research and facilitate the understanding of the current complex situation of social sustainability issues.

The main research question in this thesis is somewhat broad and therefore three sub questions have been used as a support for thesis. The interview guide was developed based on the three sub questions. The sub questions also served as a basis for the analysis as well as the discussion and they all provided necessary input to the answer of the main research question.

2.2.1 Interviews

At the beginning of the study, a few initial interviews were carried out with representatives at JM and practitioners within the field of social sustainability. They were held to give insights to the concept of social sustainability within the construction field today and also to decide what type of projects that could be of interest for this research. Based on these initial interviews the four suitable projects in Gothenburg and Stockholm were chosen and an interview guide was produced. Interviews were conducted with project developers working in early stages in development projects at JM and with project managers at the City Planning Offices at the two municipalities who work closely with the developer. The aim with the interviews was to find out how the interviewees see the concepts of social sustainability and what social aspects they integrate in their projects today. Also, the aim was to get an understanding of how the working process and cooperation regarding social sustainability aspects work today, desires for the future, and what values that can be created with a focus on social sustainability.

The interviews were semi-structured and consisted of both prepared questions and questions that naturally evolved during the interviews. If the interviews had been completely unstructured it would have caused lower internal validity (Collis & Hussey, 2009). The interviews contained open-ended questions with the purpose to get the interviewee’s opinion, and in that way enable evaluation of the current situation regarding social sustainability and value creation. According to Bhattacherjee (2012) open-ended questions leave it up to the respondents to develop their own reasoning and prevent the researcher from steering the answers. The interview guide was therefore developed in order to give the respondents the ability to answer freely to the questions and to not feel limited by the questions.

After the first interview was held the interview guide was followed-up and some questions were revised in order to be more beneficial during the upcoming interviews. Another revision that was made was the addition of some supplementary questions that were used if the respondent found it difficult to answer the main question. The follow-up questions were asked when it was necessary in order to clarify or exemplify a statement. Before the interview every respondent got the opportunity to see the questions before hand. This decision was taken based on the initial interviews where the respondents had problems to answer the questions when they did not have time to think about the questions before hand. The risk

(13)

importantly the respondents were able to answer the questions. At the time of the interviews the respondents were informed that they are completely anonymous and they were asked if it was okay that the interview was recorded.

Since interviews were performed with respondents from both Stockholm and Gothenburg the interviews were conducted both face-to-face and by telephone. Face-to-face interviews can give a more nuanced view of the responses and therefore interviews were held face-to-face when it was possible. The interviews lasted around one hour and all interviews were conducted with both researchers acting as questioners in order to enable a more objective interpretation of the answers generated by the interviewees. Key words were written down during the interviews to complement the recordings. After each interview a summary of the interviewees’ opinion was written down and parts referred to in the analysis were transcribed.

2.2.2 Sample

Population is the possible respondents to target groups and the selection of the population occurs in three sampling steps (Bhattacherjee, 2012). The first step consists of deciding on a population. A population can be defined as all people/units/organizations with the characteristics one wishes to study. The population does in this case consist of all residential developers and municipalities in Sweden working with social sustainability in the planning process. The second step in the sampling process is to choose the so-called sampling frame, which is an accessible section of the target population. The sampling frame does therefore consist of the developer JM and the two municipalities Stockholm and Gothenburg. The final step is to choose a sample from the sampling frame using a sampling technique.

Sampling techniques can according to Bhattacherjee (2012) be grouped into two broad categories;

probability (random) sampling and nonprobability sampling. In probability sampling every unit in the population has a chance of being selected in the sample, whilst in nonprobability sampling some units of the population have zero chance of selection (Bhattacherjee, 2012). In this research the nonprobability sampling technique called snowball sampling has been used. In a snowball sampling technique a few respondents are chosen that match the criteria for inclusion in the study. The respondents are then asked to recommend others that also meet the criteria. Two informal initial interviews were held with the chiefs of the personnel working with earlier phases of residential development at JM in Stockholm and Gothenburg and they recommended representatives from JM based on their professional roles within the company. The respondents all work in the earlier planning phases of the project and all communicate with the representatives from the municipality. In order to sample a population from the municipalities the respondents from the developer provided the research with contact information to officials at the municipalities in Stockholm and Gothenburg. This enabled contact with respondents at the municipality that have actually worked together with the respondents from the developer in the specific projects looked upon in the research. Because a nonprobability sampling technique such as the snowball technique do not allow estimation of sampling errors it is important to bear in mind that sampling bias might occur.

Therefore, sampling bias has to be considered when generalizing the information back to the population.

The sample of the population consists of two groups; see Table 1 and Table 2. The first group contains representatives from the developer that work as project developers and are responsible during the planning process of the projects. The second group consists of representatives from the municipalities that work at the City Planning Office and are responsible for planning and design issues in the chosen projects.

(14)

Table 1. The representatives of the developer.

Interviewee Position of Interviewee Connected to project City

1 Business/Project developer Björkhöjdsskolan Gothenburg

2 Project manager Björkhöjdsskolan Gothenburg

3 Project developer Kvibergs Ängar Gothenburg

4 Project developer Kista Äng Stockholm

5 Project developer Kv. Kabelverket Stockholm

Table 2. The representatives of the municipalities.

Interviewee Position of Interviewee Connected to project City 6 Planning architect/project manager Björkhöjdsskolan Gothenburg

7 Planning architect/project manager Kvibergs Ängar Gothenburg

8 Planning architect/project manager Kista Äng Stockholm

9 Planning architect/project manager Kv. Kabelverket Stockholm

2.2.3 Documents, internal and external

As a complement to the interviews both internal and external documentation were used in the research.

Internal documents from the developer were used to gain an understanding of how the developer address social sustainability aspects in the planning process today. As of today JM have no developed tools or guidelines on how to implement social sustainability in development projects but a new tool that has the potential to address social aspects was examined.

External documents provided by the municipality of Stockholm and Gothenburg were used in two ways.

Documentation in the shape of DDPs was used to create a picture of the four projects being studied in this research. Apart from providing information about the specific projects, external information about how the two municipalities address social aspects in the planning process today, and one existing tool, were examined and used as inspiration for the recommendation to developers.

2.2.4 Literature review

The purpose of the literature review is to present and evaluate research that has already been done within the research area. The literature review is including academic theories and knowledge that is important for the future research (Saunders et al., 2009). The focus of the literature review is social sustainability, sustainable development, value creation and the Swedish planning system. The literature about the Swedish planning system is included in order to explain the legal framework that to a great extent steer and influence cooperation between the developer and the municipality.

2.3 Quality of research

This chapter reasons the quality of the research on the basis of the criteria’s reliability and validity. By paying attention to both reliability and validity in the research design the possibility of getting the wrong answers in the research can be reduced (Saunders et al., 2009). Validity and reliability is followed by a source criticism.

2.3.1 Validity

Validity refers to the extent to which the method will measure what it is suppose to measure (Bhattacherjee, 2012). In other words whether the findings are really about what they appear to be about (Saunders et al., 2009). Validity can be divided into internal and external validity. Internal validity is about how well the research corresponds to the reality. External validity is a measure of generalizability and refers to whether the observed associations can be generalized from the sample to the population (Bhattacherjee, 2012).

(15)

The chosen method to collect empirical information consists mostly of interviews with representatives from the developer and the municipalities. To ensure internal validity the choice of interviewees were done according to the representative’s role in the company/municipality and their area of expertise. The chosen representatives in each project have had a close cooperation during the planning process. To achieve high internal validity it is also important to make sure that the respondents have the opportunity to answer the interview questions freely without being influenced by questions with leading character.

Therefore, the interview guide was developed in order to provide this opportunity to the respondents.

Since it is important to ask relevant questions in order to obtain relevant answers to the research, the interview questions have been carefully designed, followed-up and reversed when needed.

The chosen representatives in the interview study are all representatives from different development projects. The representatives have different backgrounds, skills and experiences, and the projects vary in size, tenure forms, location, ownership, project initiation etc. By conducting interviews with interviewees in different projects the external validity of the research is increased, as this generates more generalizable data. The aim is to provide a more general picture of the approach in residential projects today and therefore high external validity is important.

Even though the method includes a number of interviewees with different backgrounds and experiences, the research still represent a small sample of the population. The research is limited to only one developer, two municipalities and four projects. In order to gain a high external validity the study should include multiple projects in several municipalities with different developers. This would lead to a study that provides a more general answer to how a residential developer should work with social sustainability in the planning process. It is important to bear in mind that the selection of respondents is not random but strategically done. This might affect the end result and indicates a low external validity.

2.3.2 Reliability

Reliability refers to the extent to which the method will yield consistent findings (Saunders et al., 2009). A reliable method delivers the same result if the study is repeated on several occasions, assuming the underlying phenomenon is not changing. Note that reliability implies consistency but not necessary accuracy (Bhattacherjee, 2012).

In qualitative studies it can be difficult to ensure reliability. Some argue that the concept of reliability is irrelevant in qualitative research while others claim that reliability is one factor that any qualitative researcher should be concerned of while designing a study, analyzing the results and judging the quality of a study. In order to ensure reliability in qualitative research it is important to examine the trustworthiness (Golafshani, 2003). In order to establish trustworthiness, and thus increase reliability the method choices in this research are well explained and argued for.

According to Lewis et al. (2009), one threat to reliability is the observer error and bias. Individuals have different ways of asking questions as well as ways to interpret the respondents’ answers. Using interviews as a method entails a risk that the study will become subjective and formed from the interviewer’s perspective, which will affect the reliability of the research. To ensure reliability, an interview guide was developed and documented. The interview guide is presented in Appendix 3. Also, the same interview questions were asked to all representatives in the study. Except that some interviews were conducted over telephone, all the interviews were carried out in the same way, including two (the same) interviewers and one interviewee for each occasion. In order to avoid incorrect interpretations the interviews were recorded and the used parts were compiled and transcribed. The respondents have been able to approve what has been written, but due to the lack of time they have not been able to give feedback on everything they have added to the research, which might have a negative effect on the result.

According to Lewis et al. (2009) other threats to reliability is participant error and bias. The

(16)

2.3.3 Source criticism

The existing theories and previous literature that forms the basis of the literature review and the theoretical framework has been carefully reviewed regarding authority, credibility, quality and content.

This research has used several different sources such as; articles, reports, books, websites, master theses etc. The chosen articles are written by credible authors and published in scientific journals. The reports are to a large extent published by Swedish authorities. Both older and more recent sources have been used in the research. The older sources have primarily been used to give the study a historical perspective, but in many cases the older sources are consistent with more recent sources and are therefore assumed to remain relevant.

Both the interviews with experts and the representatives from the developer and the municipalities have been carefully executed and reviewed. The interviewed experts are as mentioned experts on their specific area and are considered to be credible sources. The representatives from the developer and the municipality works daily with the planning process in development projects and are therefore considered to be credible in this research. However, the interviewees representing the developer and the municipality are more likely to be subjective in this study compared to the experts that most likely are objective. This is important to bear in mind when evaluating the end result.

Throughout the research, the intent has been to apply an objective approach to the collection of data from all sources chosen.

(17)

3. Literature review

--- The literature review chapter will start off with a short presentation of current knowledge within the field of sustainability followed by a more in depth review of the current state of knowledge on social sustainability. Thereafter follows a summary of the Swedish planning system as it works today and finally previous literature regarding values will be presented.

--- 3.1 The concept of sustainability

Sustainable development as a concept is not especially new. During the 1960s the environment became significantly important as a world issue, and the concept of sustainability arose as a response to the concern about environmental degradation from poor management of resources (McKenzie, 2004). In 1987 The World Commission on Environmental Development (WCED) released the report Our Common Future, also known as the Brundtland Report. The report defines sustainable development as:

“..development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”

Further on, it distinguishes two key concepts of sustainable development. The first is the concept of

“needs”, which refers to the essential needs of the world’s poor. The second concept highlights that the environment's ability to meet present and future needs depends strongly on the state of technology and social organizations. (WCED, 1987)

Our Common Future primarily reflects on the environmental dimension of sustainability and it was not until later the other dimensions of sustainability were brought to light. Apart from the environmental aspect there are two other components of sustainability; economic and social. The three concepts are often referred to as the “triple bottom line approach” and sustainable development can only be effectively attained if all these three aspects are addressed appropriately (Edum-Fotwe & Price, 2009). The sustainability concepts are interlinked and should not be isolated from each other (Chiu, 2004). The combination of the three aspects of sustainability is illustrated in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Illustration of the triple bottom line approach. (Inspired by Edum-Fotwe and Price, 2009)

John Elkington was the one who coined the phrase “triple bottom line approach” in 1994 and it consists of the three Ps: profit, people and planet. The approach aims at measuring the financial (profit), social (people) and environmental (planet) performance of a company over a period of time. (Elkington, 2000)

(18)

In contrast to Edum-Fotwe and Prices (2009) view that the three components are interlinked McKenzie (2004) presents a model that displays the relationship between the components as three concentric spheres, see Figure 3 for an illustration. The main principle with this view of sustainability is that economic and social aspects are dependent of the environmental one.

Figure 3. Model of sustainability developed by McKenzie. (Inspired by McKenzie, 2004)

A third way of looking at the relationship between the economic, social and environmental component is presented by Griessler and Littig (2005) as a three-pillar model, see Figure 4 for an illustration. The three- pillar model implies that sustainable development can only be achieved if social, economical and environmental goals are equally met.

Figure 4. Three pillar model. (Inspired by Griessler and Littig, 2005)

3.2 The concept of Social Sustainability

Social sustainability is one of the aspects included in the definition of sustainability (Edum-Fotwe & Price, 2009). The three aspects: environmental, economic and social, should all be equally worth and can only contribute to sustainable development if they are addressed appropriately (McKenzie, 2004). However, social issues do not gain the same response as economic and environmental issues (Vallance et al., 2011).

Current sustainability studies in construction especially address environmental and economical issues (Zuo et al., 2012). Social sustainability is a difficult concept to define and achieve and has therefore been frequently avoided in research. Instead there is greater focus on environmental and economical issues (Vallance et al., 2011). This can be explained by the fact that a clear theoretical concept of social sustainability is still missing (Griessler & Littig, 2005).

Economic

Social

Environmental

(19)

3.2.1 Definition

Social sustainability can in a broad sense be looked upon as the philosophy that future generations shall have at least, and preferably even more access to social resources than the current generation. A decent life including security, health, equity and access to basic needs should be the right of any inhabitant in any community (Zuo et al., 2012). However, a standard theoretical definition of social sustainability does not exist according to (Griessler & Littig, 2005). Though, some definitions have been developed in previous research:

According to McKenzie (2004) social sustainability is “a life-enhancing condition within communities, and a process within communities that can achieve that condition.” McKenzie argue that the definition is more suitable on a local level. When placing social sustainability within a context a more general definition of the concept can be avoided.

Generally, researchers also describe social sustainability as “the engagement among employees, local communities, clients, and the supply chain to ensure meeting the needs of current and future populations and communities” (Valdes-Vasquez & Klotz, 2013). This definition does according to Valdes-Vasquez and Klotz more fully reflect the different stakeholders perspectives of a construction project.

Even though there are several different definitions of social sustainability it is still only a concept and therefore it can be very difficult to grasp (Magnusson, 2015). “Social sustainability is neither an absolute nor a constant. Social sustainability has to be considered as a dynamic concept, which will change over time (from year to year/decade to decade) in a place” (Dempsey et al., 2011). Because social sustainability represents a shifting and relational concept Manizi et al. (2010) choose not to give a definition of what precisely constitutes social sustainability in the urban planning context.

3.2.2 Social Sustainability in the community

According to UNESCO, a city or community of solidarity and citizenship, where social sustainability is achieved ”must address the following challenges: to combat against intolerance; to affirm solidarity as a fundamental value of democracy, to promote the culture of peace, especially in cities after a period of conflict; and to advocate for education in citizenship” (Pareja-Eastaway, 2012). In other words, social sustainability can be achieved in cities when personal development and growth are guaranteed at the same time as diversity and respect go hand in hand.

The heart of social sustainability contains of housing, together with employment and services (Pareja- Eastaway, 2012). The primary purpose of residential development is to meet housing needs and to improve housing conditions (Chiu, 2004). At a community level, inhabitants right to decent housing forms the principle that ensures the potential development of social sustainability (Pareja-Eastaway, 2012). A challenge for the achievement of social sustainability in communities and cities today are the integration of housing with other areas of public intervention as education, health and other social areas in order to secure an effective strategy regarding housing provision (Pareja-Eastaway, 2012).

Member countries of the European Union, including Sweden, have signed the so-called ‘Bristol Accord’, which is a common approach to sustainable communities. The ‘Bristol Accord’ defines sustainable communities as “places where people want to live and work, now and in the future. They meet the diverse needs of existing and future residents, are sensitive to their environment, and contribute to a high quality of life. They are safe and inclusive, well planned, built and run, and offer equality of opportunity and good services for all”. (ODPM, 2005)

(20)

3.2.3 Social Sustainability in the construction industry

As mentioned in Chapter 1 the construction industry has a major impact on the society and the awareness of sustainability has for a long time been an important topic for both industry and academia (Zuo et al., 2012; Pareja-Eastaway, 2012). Brent and Labuschagne (2006) describe the social aspect of social sustainability as the ”weakest pillar of sustainable development”. This can according to Zuo et al. (2012) be considered as a result from the lack of analytical and theoretical underpinning. Guidelines for considering and measuring social sustainability criteria in the construction industry seem to be missing.

The construction industry satisfies the society by producing a variety of buildings and infrastructure. The industry also contributes to national GDP and provides a large number of employment opportunities (Zuo et al., 2012). However, according to Zuo et al. (2012) and Said et al. (2010) the negative impact on the environment due to the construction activity has resulted in a negative attitude towards construction projects. Both industry and academic have worked hard to target the sustainability issues in the construction industry (Zuo et al., 2012). However, many issues connected to environmental sustainability have been recognized for a long time, while social sustainability issues have not been addressed in the same extent (Edum-Fotwe & Price, 2009). Due to the fact that construction can be seen as a social process, the social aspect of sustainability requires more attention. During the last decade, the importance of the social dimension of sustainable development has been recognized from both the private and the public sector. Though, at the moment there are a limited number of studies that focus on social sustainability in construction (Zuo et al., 2012).

According to Said et al. (2010) more attention is required to social sustainability during the feasibility study of construction projects. The concept of social sustainability is constantly evolving and it is important to define the social sustainability processes that should be integrated during the planning and design phase of construction projects (Valdes-Vasquez & Klotz, 2013). Even though the social sustainability process should be considered early in construction projects, it is of great importance that issues regarding social sustainability is taken into consideration during all phases; design, planning and production (Zuo et al., 2012).

Yang et al. (2010) argue that social responsibility is considered most important for stakeholder management in construction projects. Stakeholder theory is often associated and connected with corporate social responsibility. Also, it is completely necessary to engage stakeholders early in the decision making process in order to achieve social sustainability in construction projects according to Brent and Labuschagne (2006) cited in Zuo et al. (2012). A model to visualize that social sustainability matters in residential development and is related to three different groups of stakeholders; internal stakeholders, external stakeholders and stakeholders at a macro level has been developed by Brent and Labuschagne (2006), cited in Zuo et al. (2012). Professionals working in the construction project, e.g. residential developer employees are considered internal stakeholders whilst the communities and citizens around the project are considered external stakeholders (Zuo et al., 2012). See Figure 5 below for an illustration of the model.

Macro level

External stakeholers

Internal stakeholders

Figure 5. Three stakeholder categories. (Inspired by Brent and Labuschagne, 2006)

(21)

3.2.3.1 Focus areas

A previous thesis by Frögelius and Ljung (2015) on social sustainability in residential development has identified different focus areas that the developer should adapt early in their projects. Their findings are based on social sustainability theories and models that were used to analyze findings from interviewed Swedish municipalities. Their recommendation is that the developer should use the identified focus areas from the municipality in order to create common objectives for social sustainability. This strategy facilitates the communication towards the end customer and the municipality. Also, by working with social sustainability the developer can achieve responsible reputation in media and from the public.

The developer should choose and adapt at least one of the focus areas in each project. The focus area should be consistent with the municipality’s vision of the project and the concerned area. The selection of the focus area should be done in early stages, before the DDP has been developed and the boundaries for the project are set. (Frögelius & Ljung, 2015) The recommended focus areas can be found in Figure 6.

Figure 6. Recommended focus areas according to Frögelius and Ljung (2015).

(22)

3.2.3.2 Obstacles and barriers

Knowledge management and further education are of great importance to achieve sustainable development. Lack of knowledge among key stakeholders and municipalities in the built environment is a barrier that prevents sustainable urban and regional development. Also the absence of follow-up hinders learning from own experience. (DHS, 2012)

According to Zuo et al. (2012), major barriers to achieve social sustainability comprises cost and lack of education, awareness and knowledge. The biggest barrier to improved social performance in the construction industry is the cost involved. Many believe that social performance in construction projects does not lead to financial gains to the project owner. Boverket (2010) describes this as there has been a lack of measuring and evaluating the economic impact of social sustainability measures. There is a need to analyze the social implications in the construction industry and evaluate these effects in relation to economic and environmental impacts. Further on, Zuo et al. (2012) argue that the current lack of education and awareness of social impacts is prohibiting social sustainability in the construction industry.

There is a significant lack of awareness of what social sustainability entails and how it can be implemented in the construction industry.

The Delegation for Sustainable Cities (Delegationen för hållbara städer) was appointed by the Swedish Government for the time period 2008-2010 to implement various measures that contribute to improved conditions for the development of sustainable cities. Their report describes fifteen overall and prominent obstacles to rapid and sustainable urban development in Sweden. Obstacles are defined as different phenomenon that stands in the way of a desirable change, or as inertia that makes the change slow in relation to the challenges and goals. Especially obstacle number 2 relates to social sustainability (DHS, 2012):

“Values linked to quality of life and the urban appeal is not given enough weight in planning and decision making.”

In order to overcome this obstacle urban development should be based on how people perceive and use the physical environment and how it can become more attractive, environmentally sustainable, pleasant and safer. The aim with sustainable urban development is according to the delegation therefore to promote and create values that provide opportunities for a richer quality of life and contributes to the increased attractiveness of cities. As an example, it is necessary that values such as health, equality, security, justice, trust as well as architectural and urban quality become more significant in socio-economic calculations. Or in other words, these type of soft values need to be just as important as more quantifiable values in urban development. (DHS, 2012)

3.2.4 Citylab

Citylab is a forum for shared knowledge within sustainable urban development and turns to individuals as well as to various types of urban development projects, both large and small projects can participate.

Sweden Green Building Council (SGBC) created Citylab in the fall of 2015 together with the construction industry. Citylabs vision is to have a joint working process that engage and promote sustainable development. Citylab consists of three different parts that interact with each other: Citylab Action, Citylab Learning and Citylab Network. Citylab Learning provides the opportunity for education within issues related to sustainable urban development and Citylab Network is a network working with sustainable urban development where people who work with these issues can meet and exchange experience and knowledge. (SGBC, 2016b)

(23)

3.2.4.1 Citylab Action

In order to provide opportunities for a dedicated and effective process where the goals of sustainable urban development can be reached the guide Citylab Action was created. The guide formulates both sustainability objectives and sets the framework for a good process control.

Apart from the guide, Citylab Action also includes a program for meetings where urban development projects share knowledge and experiences between projects. At the same time projects get the opportunity to, with the support of experts, work with their own sustainability program based on the different policy areas in the guide for sustainable urban development. (SGBC, 2016c)

Through its 7 Principles, 17 Sustainable Objectives and 4 Sustainability Process Themes, the guide provides support for urban development projects. The guide is focusing on the planning of an urban development project where a clear process control creates preconditions to transform the 17 sustainability objectives into the urban development project's own project goals. The aim with Citylab Action is to reach 10 effects that to a great extent relate to the social aspects of sustainability (SGBC, 2016a).

Among them are:

- Creating conditions for good health and well-being.

- Creating conditions for equality and social cohesion.

- Participation and influence is a fundamental requirement and should apply to all.

- The design of a safe living environment where residents, active and visitors can live on equal terms.

- Promoting and creating value that provides conditions for an attractive urban life - a sustainable and diverse city open to mixed cultures.

Proposed process

In Citylab Action a proposed process control is presented. The process control includes organization, collaboration, participation and innovation. The overall aim is to ensure that all sustainability aspects (economic, environmental and social) are taken into account in project planning, implementation and operation, management and continued development. (SGBC, 2016a)

Organization:

Organization refers to how an urban development project should be managed, staffed and sustainability coordinated. The aim is to manage the business so that the right thing is done at the right time and in the right way, to provide conditions for achieving the project objectives. Urban development projects should therefore have a clear plan of how the work of the organization's stakeholders and interests should be coordinated, with the goal of achieving holistic solutions. A major challenge for the project is for the organization to also integrate so-called soft issues both in the project's early stages as in a management function.(SGBC, 2016a)

Collaboration:

Collaboration and cooperation between different actors in the project organization is a prerequisite for the project objectives to be realized. Process control must therefore include a clear strategy for how the organization's stakeholders interact, with the goal of creating comprehensive solutions, multi-functionality and flexibility. Collaboration refers to strategies, processes, tools and methods for project stakeholders to coordinate their activity and responsibility. (SGBC, 2016a)

Participation:

Participation is about the right of citizens to be actively involved in urban development. This applies primarily to residents and those working in or visiting the area. A key challenge for urban development projects is how citizens and local actors interests and knowledge can be managed systematically and constructively. The premise is that sustainable urban development is created through an inclusive

(24)

Innovation:

Citylab encourage urban development projects to challenge complex issues with the support of innovation. Many societal challenges cannot be solved by traditional interventions, because the problems are largely complicated and complex, and often depend on local conditions. To address local challenges require effective cooperation between politicians, public and private stakeholders and researchers.

Management by objectives is preferred before micromanagement in order to ensure a constructive development, and to avoid getting caught in various specific and technical solutions. (SGBC, 2016a) A more detailed description of the proposed process control as well as the 7 Principles, 17 Sustainable Objectives, 4 Sustainability Process Themes and 10 effects can be found in the guide Citylab Action.

Citylab Action is a new released process addressing sustainability aspects in urban development and the pilot round of the program started in January 2016. (SGBC, 2016a)

3.3 Swedish Planning System

3.3.1 Political control

Sweden has three democratic elected political levels:

1. The local level consisting of 290 municipalities

2. The regional level, which is the 20 County Councils and regions

3. The national level including the Swedish Parliament and the Government.

Each of these levels has their self-governing local authorities (Hägglund, 2014). In Sweden both politicians and officials lead the municipalities (Jonsson et al., 2012), and directly elected council governs the municipalities. Every four years, the citizens elect politicians to the Municipal Council (kommunfullmäktige).

The election takes place simultaneously with parliamentary election (Hägglund, 2014).

The elected politicians in the municipalities take decisions related to services that concern the citizens. For example, planning and development are political processes, which the elected leaders are responsible for.

The decision-making that is based on regional and local conditions is known as local self-government. The local self-government gives the municipality the right to make independent decisions. Despite this, the municipalities must also comply with central government decisions that affect their activities. The municipalities’ activities must be compatible with provisions such as The Planning and Building Act (PBA), the Environmental Code, and other legislation and guidelines issued by the national level.

(Hägglund, 2014)

The municipalities in Sweden have the main responsibility over planning of land and water areas that take place according to PBA. Since the municipalities are governed by politicians, spatial planning is influenced by the political governance (Hägglund, 2014). The initiative for land-use planning can be taken by the municipality itself or an outside actor, for example a private developer. In the end, it is only the municipality through the municipal planning monopoly that has the authority to adopt plans and decide if the planning process should be initiated or not (Boverket, 2016b).

3.3.2 Municipal tools in urban development

The Swedish planning system according to PBA consists of regional plans, comprehensive plans, area regulations, DDPs and building permits. These plans and regulations are tools used by the municipality to ensure suitable land use and sustainable development. The hierarchy of the plans and permits is shown in Figure 7. The decisions about planning and building should also consider public and private interests.

(Thune Hedström & Lundström, 2014)

(25)

Figure 7. Hierarchy of plans and permits according to PBA. (Inspired by Thune Hedström and Lundström, 2014) 3.3.2.1 Comprehensive plan

The comprehensive plan is a tool that indicates the direction of the long-term development of the physical environment. All comprehensive plans should include all aspects of sustainability (Hägglund, 2014). Each municipality is required to have an updated comprehensive plan, which covers the geographic area of the municipality. The plan is not legally binding but provides guidance for decisions taken by the municipality and other authorities. It facilitates decision making related to the DDP and decisions regarding planning outside areas regulated by DDPs. The comprehensive plan considers both public and national interests.

The comprehensive plan plays an important role as guidance towards a more sustainable future (Boverket, 2016c). The overall conditions for sustainable development are determined in the comprehensive plan, and social housing objectives are often included (Boverket, 2010).

3.3.2.2 Detailed Development Plan

The DDP aims to regulate the development of land and water areas. The municipality decides if, when and how a plan should be developed, together with the content of the plan. In contrast to the comprehensive plan the DDP is legally binding. (Boverket, 2010). The DDP delimits public and private land as well as water areas. The plan regulates what functions are allowed to be used in specific areas, for example housing, industry, roads, nature, etc. Also quality regulations such as building size and height, design features, numbers of floors, etc. are included in the plan. (Thune Hedström & Lundström, 2014) Today it is common that the DDP is developed in connection to a specific project. The developer can be the initiator to the planning process but it is still the municipality that has the formal responsibility over the planning process, and the decisions that have to be made. However, because of the increasing influence from the developer, the municipalities control over the process decreases, and negotiations always exist with the developer. (Boverket, 2010)

The detailed development planning process Preliminary response:

Usually the planning process is initiated by the municipality itself or by a property owner that can be an individual or a private developer. In many cases this results in negotiations about purchase of land, which often is owned by the municipality. A developer that is interested in a specific area has the right to require a preliminary response from the municipality that states if the municipality will initiate the development of the plan or not. (Thune Hedström & Lundström, 2014)

Addressing social sustainability in residential development - An analysis of a residential developer and two municipalities in Sweden